Justice for Victims?

On Wednesday morning I learned that Connecticut’s death penalty repeal bill had unexpectedly failed after two state Senators – Edith Prague and Andrew Maynard – decided to change their votes from “Aye” to “Nay” at the urging of Dr. William J. Petit, whose wife and two daughters were murdered during a home invasion by two paroled felons.

Prague and Maynard both insisted that they still opposed the death penalty and would vote to repeal the death penalty when the bill is re-introduced next year. However, they said they were motivated by a desire to comfort Dr. Petit – and the death penalty for the perpetrators is the comfort that he said he wanted.

In granting Dr. Petit’s wish, Prague and Maynard ignored the wishes of 83 Connecticut murder victim family members who, in a signed letter, urged the state legislature to repeal Connecticut’s death penalty statute. All 83 said that the death penalty in their state brought them more pain than comfort. They said they would rather see the millions of dollars wasted on the death penalty invested in violence prevention and victims’ assistance.

When it comes to the death penalty, some victims get more respect than others. It’s a system that picks and chooses, often arbitrarily. If the crime is high profile and the victim is high status, then the death penalty might be a possibility. Media and politics play a big part. Seemingly, most victims and their families aren’t important enough to merit the time, expense, and effort of a death penalty prosecution – prosecutors working tirelessly for months, placing other cases on the back burner, going that extra ten thousand miles in pursuit of “ultimate justice.”

Are we to conclude, then, that murder victim family members in non-capital cases experience less pain and grief? That their need to see justice done (however we define it) is somehow less compelling? That would be an absurd conclusion.

On Thursday evening, while dining with my wife Linda at Appleby’s, I glanced up and saw the scrolling news blurb on CNN: “Unabomber items to be auctioned on the internet.”

As most of you know, the Unabomber is my brother Ted, who is serving life imprisonment with no possibility of parole at the federal supermax prison in Colorado.

The federal government spent an estimated eight million dollars on my brother’s death penalty trial. Fortunately, my brother didn’t get the death penalty. So, in some sense, the money went to waste.

Do you know how much the Unabomber’s victims received in assistance from the federal government? You might think it would add up to a lot given that 23 people were injured and three killed.

The victims got nothing.

Now, 13 years after the trial, the US government has come up with a plan to compensate the Unabomber’s victims by selling items seized from his cabin at auction on the internet. Now, my brother lived in poverty. The value of his possessions derives almost entirely from public fascination with his crimes. They represent what is commonly called “murderabilia” – souvenirs culled from the careers of famous criminals.

In effect, our federal government is pandering to a sick market that treats high profile killers like celebrities and rock stars. What is wrong with this picture?

The goal of the auction is entirely worthy. If there is no other way to compensate the victims of the Unabomber, then let the auction go forward. I will look away…and I hope it raises a ton of money.

But couldn’t we, to the extent we really care about victims, find a better way?

If you’re interested in finding a better way to meet victims’ needs, you could begin by reading Susan Herman’s groundbreaking book: “Parallel Justice for Victims of Crime.”

112 Responses

I don’t believe they should have changed their votes. It makes them look like they do not stand up for their beliefs; because they don’t.

That being said, I am all for the death penalty. Basically we are told to trust the system. The system will get the murder -we shouldn’t take things into our own hands- so the victims’ families wait for that to happen, if it ever does. Then the system will prosecute the murderer and again the families wait to see if justice is done; sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. All of that waiting and not knowing anything about the investigation because we have to trust the system. If someone killed one of my loved ones I would want to kill him or her. The system says, “don’t” because they will do it for me.

Although his political opinion differs from mine – he supports the death penalty, and I want it abolished – he’s living in a nightmare.

He lost his entire family in 2007, but he’s stuck on the stage of media and politics.

Rather than all the complex emotions that he realistically feels inside, his feelings have become a Kabuki dance of rage and grief.

The involvement of politicians and the media in his personal tragedy may be harming his ability to settle down and cope.

I don’t blame him for staying involved, rather than giving himself time to cope. If Petit settled down, he might do something very dangerous for a man to do in our culture: he might find himself crying, not only at unfairness or for those he loved, but also for himself.

Interesting, I agree. I too, sadly in my family I had a cousin who I only learned about in the last yr was the man who murder 4 coworkers at the Dept of Labor or Unemployment I think SUNY state campus here in Albany yrs ago and then turned the gun on himself as the police closed in on him. I was a young kid then and I was not informed on the incident. It was a hushed conversation and no one was to speak of in my family for fear someone would find out we were related in some form or manner.
Do I feel the families of the victims of that incident should have been compensated in some way?
For sure..but back then many red flags I saw when I researched the event , he was under a state doctor’s care, was there not more the doctor could do ??
There was no such thing as harrassment on the job in those days and thus why the 4 victims were chosen and marked for death by him as he snapped.
I do not beleive what he did was justified. Never agree that the taking of a life in my opinion is justified for any reason. Not that I am not God fearing as I am a true Buddist.
But could I understand what occured and how it impact him and how the victims had a part in it all. Not blaming the victims here at all either.. just I was able to understand how the pieces came together.
Yes. I pray for them all the victims and their family relatives.
It shortened his father’s life. It was a burden of guilt we all carried as his relatives to commit such a unspeakable act on them. When these events occur all involved and all families suffer greatly years and generations after.
I do not think any compensation is ever going to be enough for the victims, their survivors or the family members of the perpetator who did the act.. Just my thoughts.

Was wondering if they are in fact releasing TK’s mental health records and if so how that legally happened? I have no issue with the use of the auction to raise funds for victims and their families but the release of health records appears to be a slippery slope.

I read the article about them selling your brother’s items and was thinking the same thing you did. Who are these sick people who would want such “memorabilia,” and why is the government encouraging them? I cannot imagine they would raise all that much money for the victims, and it just seems wrong.

David, Is there anything you are planning on bidding on, personal memorabilia in the form of Pictures of You and Ted ? I would have to guess that the typewriter would be one of the “big items” that may have a high dollar value attached to it……

No, I wouldn’t feel comfortable participating in this auction. While some items might have sentimental value for me, it’s primarily my memories of happier times with my brother and our family that I cherish.

I found the double level shoes used to disguise his true size fascinating. Evidence like that would have made it difficult to win an insanity defense, as it indicates a clear desire to avoid detection …. Your brother was both clever and careful and calculating, which contributed greatly to his ability to avoid law enforcement for so long…..

Seriously mentally ill people are often highly intelligent, like Ted. As you point out, mentally ill offenders are often judged legally sane because of the disconnenction that exists between medical definitions of mental illness and the legal definition of insanity.

I agree with you David on those with mental illiness being highly intelligent.My family member graduated from Siena and was highly intelligent but I beleive he had a mental illiness as well that no one picked up on sadly but the signs were there you know.He was reserved, smart, quiet kept to himself.

I saw the story on the auction & I too t the death penaltyhad the initial response of repulsion, but I am glad that it connected me to finding your blog.

Having been a Victim more then once in life, most recently of an armed robbery which I spent 2yrs in court for, I am 100% against violence. Having conciously taken that stand, though it sometimes is a difficult choice, I stand 100% against the death penalty.

Off the auction but a similiar repulsion happened here in CA that appalled me. It had to do with the execution of Stanley “Tookie” Williams who I knew by sight decades ago & knew what a horrible person he was then. When he was arrested for the murders the street people said it was trumped up charges but I thought “Good” he finally got his”.

Most people know of Tookie’s reputation but few seem to know of the incredible change & work he did the last decade of his life. The night of his execution I sat alone somber in the dark with a glass of wine. at about 12:23 long after the appointed time, but later I read exactly when Tookie died, there was an incredible number of CHP sirens blasting lights rolling speeding north on 101. (I live within 100yds of it) Within moments the same happened but more cars including sherrifs going south on 101! Then there was a group going west through our small town of 10,000. Up down & around these groups of Police, Sherrifs & Highway Patrol paraded with their sirens & lights for about 15minutes.

It still makes me so sad & teary to write about this. Our protectors parading, celebrating a man’s death. A man put to death by a Governor who once lifted weights with the man. Horribly sad because nothing Nothing could have proven the political maneuverings of killing stanley Tookie Willms like that show of noise & lights did; that our state felt they had to kill him as a symbolic measure to please their constituents.

I’m glad I finally found a place that I think my story will receive the understanding of that night’s ‘show as 98% of America stopped their minds at the word crips, never hear about the 5 Nobel Peace prize nominations & refuse to hear more.
That a man went from the worst ghetto violence to prison & death row to world reknowned recognition for fighting for Peace should be hidden from the American public is very sad.

Hi CH (11) ! Geez, I don’t know, maybe they would be covering the Unabomber case in a relevant course segment in Philosophy, Law, Psychology,Criminology, Theology, or even Sociology. Since you are so obviously the expert on this (owing to your in depth study), I will wait for your definitive answer on this subject.

I find it disgusting that so-called “mentally ill geniuses” get off. What the Unibomber did was unimaginable. Put all these scumbags to death. Dr. Petit deserves to see his family’s killers executed. The Unibombers victims, unfortunately, have no platform to speak, he executed them. While I feel it’s “honorable” to defend one’s brother, the bottom line is that these Monsters are ultimately sane enough to devise these evil plots, but unwilling to pay for their crimes. My family has suffered the unimaginable act of a gruesome murder, perpetrated by a Monster, so I can speak MY peace. The inhumane “human” who committed this act will one day be free, which to me is another crime. When will society STOP making Monsters, like the Unibomber seem like they are some sort of modern day Robin Hood ?? David, I applaud your loyalty, but wonder how you would feel if you were on the other side. Some crimes deserve the Death penalty. PERIOD. I’m sure the victims of Ted’s rampage would also “cherish” memories, because that is all they have, Thanks to Ted.

The auction does ring a little strange to me, and I’m obviously more removed from the events than you are. We wonder why there’s so much violence in our society; then we patronize music, tv shows, video games, and movies that glamorize violence.

I think the death penalty has to exist as a rare option, but I agree with your comments on your brothers trial. The money could’ve been put to better use by helping the survivors and families.

Interesting Bob…while I only wrote yesterday about the one side of my family, I too have had member murdered as well. I dont beleive anyone is excusing the behavior or the crimes of another, as we all know, we all have to some how and in some way pay for our actions, but never did I see a comparision to the Unibomber being made to look like a modern day Robin Hood in an article or media.
So I am clear where that is coming from.
Anger is one of those things I chose not to hold on to, as it too, can impact one’s life in a negative way and shorten my life span. Guilt on the other hand has not bee so easy for me to let go of and I am still working on that, knowing and having the guilt of being related to a murderer is much harder to let go of or finds ways to do so.
Like you I can speak my “Peace” ..but the difference is I am on both sides. 1) having had a murderer and 2) having had a murder in my family. Neither which I have sat well with or able to find any peace or resolve or comfort with in all these yrs. I am hoping you find peace in time Bob.

I believe, it would have been far more valuable for the victims and the federal government to put Ted’s belongings in the National Death Penalty Archives, located on the campus of the State University of Albany. If victim families are such a priority to the federal government, why did it take 15 years?! Monies could have been raised for the victims by requesting a donation to access the materials by all who visited the Death Penalty Archives.

It’s a tremendous loss to scholars of criminal justice, mental illness and victim families who will not even know where these items ultimately wind up, as the winning bidders of the auctioned items will not be made known to the public. This is a highly unfortunate disservice to those seeking closure and better understand how we can best serve victims and their families.

I am sure those sentators sid take into account those 83 family mebers of murder victims.

Were any of those 83 cases pending capital murder trials? Likely not.

So, while recognizing the importance of the 83, they are not in the same category as Petit, who wishes to, immediately retain law, whereby his case is pending.

Furthermore, scientific polling in Ct finds that 83% support the death penalty for some crimes and 16% oppose the death penalty fo all crimes. I suspect such poll would top 95% if a valid scientific poll could poll only murder vicitms loved ones.

Therefore, the 2 senators respected Drt. Petit’s request, because of its immediacy, which the 83 folks ou invoked, did not have, plus the two senators all so respected the 83% majority in Ct, who support the death penalty, which could easily be 95% support if only polling murder victims loved ones.

Therefore, if your 83 foks are important because of their numbers, the 2 senators should weigh the 83% support and never vote to revoke the death penalty, if numbers matter and you think they do.

@Pat….Please stay on the issue. To be honest the part about “finding peace” was a bit dramatic. I’m not on here to argue, I just said to put some of these scumbags to death. Sorry you have had a rough go of things but I stand 100% behind my statement. YES TO THE DEATH PENALTY !!!

I see that Theodore Kaczynski is making headlines yet again in attempt to solve a 30 year old case of poisoned Tylenol in Chicago. So, you mean to say after all this time, the federal government never extracted Ted’s DNA? Incidentally, his journal that will be auctioned off could offer some clues to his whereabouts in 1982. Perhaps, we want to reconsider the whole auction thing.

This parallel justice concept seems to be a logical extension/hybrid of the victims right’s movement and alternative dispute resolution, and would represent a major systemic shift in how we approach our problems with crime. Thanks for the link.

It was good to hear from you. I hope we can meet some day. It seems odd to speculate about what a scientic poll of murder victim family members would find until someone actually conducts such a poll. Obviously, we move in different victim circles, but based on my personal experience, I suspect your estimate is way off. Besides, the death penalty is a difficult issue to poll. It’s not a simple for or against. When life imprisonment without parole is offered as an alternative to the death penalty, numbers change dramatically. In any case, I think you missed my point about the system’s disparate treatment of victims, and also my point that in putting extensive resources and energy into death penalty cases, we tend to neglect the other needs of murder victim family members. Even though we disagree strongly about the death penalty, maybe we could work together to advocate for better treatment, more respect, and services for victims generally. Since the death penalty is sought in only a few cases, perhaps we could accomplish more by promoting the parallel justice approach.

It is not at all “odd to speculate about what a scientific poll of murder victim family members would find until someone actually conducts such a poll.”

Speculation is a normal human exercise, hardly odd. Just as you speculated causes and motivations within your article.

You listed an important but very small set of 83 anti death penalty folks who had lost loved one to murder and who were against the death penalty and you speculated why those 2 senators chose Dr. Petit’s position and not that of those 83, as if that 83 people should weigh more than the 83% of the folks shown to support the death penalty in Ct.

Polling consistently finds 80% death penalty support when asking about capital murders, as opposed to all murders, even though and Argus Reid poll found 83% US support for that general question in Nov. 2010.

95% death penalty support by those whose loved ones were murdered in a capital crime is not much of a stretch. That is the point. If you want to emphasize the importance of those 83 folks, it is important to consider what all of those who lost loved ones to capital murder feel about the topic, as that was your reason for emphasizing the importance of the numbers of those 83.

If the numbers matter, they all matter. Based upon the voiced opposition to the death penalty, by those who lost loved ones in the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, execution support for mass murderer Timothy McVeigh may be be at 99%.

“When life imprisonment without parole is offered as an alternative to the death penalty, numbers change dramatically.”

Likely, David misinterpret the data.

The 3/6/11 Quinnapiac poll, when given the choice between the death penalty and life without parole, 48% prefer death, 43% life.

Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz misinterprets this poll as “when voters have a choice between the death penalty and life in prison with no chance of parole, support for the death penalty drops significantly.” (4) This is Schwartz’ opinion, which, I believe, is an unethical influence in the discussion, as well as being in error and unfounded.

The question for this poll is “Which punishment do you prefer for people convicted of murder, the death penalty or life in prison with no chance of parole?” Again, this is for murder, as opposed to capital murders, the only ones subject to execution.

What it shows is that given the option, respondents prefer execution over a life sentence. It suggests that a poll asking “Should juries have the option of selecting either the death penalty or a life sentence in our worst murder cases?”, that the response may show support as high as 91% (43% plus 48%) that both sanctions should be retained for the worst murderers, but likely not higher than 83%, which is the average death penalty support for the five polls dating back to 2000.

To be clear, the 48% death penalty preference is no indicator of opposition to or exclusion of a life sentence and the 43% life preference is no indicator of opposition to or exclusion of the death penalty.

It’s just like a poll finding that 48% of folks prefer chocolate ice cream and 43% prefer vanilla, with 9% having no preference, with 100% liking them both and 100% wanting to retain both.

Schwartz misinterprets both the poll and the response. Schwartz is seeing it as exclusive, as either/or, when, based upon the poll, that is completely inappropriate.

Gallup has made the same errors.

There is another problem with this poll, the statement “life in prison with no chance of parole”.

No such sentence exists. It is invented and reflects a common anti death penalty statement. The sentence is “Life Without Parole”. No one can honestly say “no chance of parole”, because that chance always exists.

Legislatures can always change laws, so that they benefit criminals and can do so, retroactively, and every executive branch can grant parole or other reduction with any sentence. In fact, legislatures and executive branches throughout the country are considering such releases and reductions of sentences, with all sanctions, as a cost saving measure.

What Q is doing, is giving additional benefits to a life sentence, which do not exist, and skews the results, because of their inaccurate wording of the question.

For example: “Which do you prefer, execution, whereby murderers can never harm/murder again or a life sentence, whereby murderers can harm/murder, again, in prison, after escape or after improper release?”

This is a totally accurate statement, but Q would likely never ask it, because it would skew the results toward execution. Yet, Q does ask a misleading question, which skews the results toward a life sentnece.

David writes: “I think you missed my point about the system’s disparate treatment of victims, and also my point that in putting extensive resources and energy into death penalty cases, we tend to neglect the other needs of murder victim family members.”

I specifically paid attention to the disparate treatment of victims.

You were speculating at to why those 2 senators gave more weight to Petit than for those 83. I gave a specific reason for that, as well as emphasizing the overwhelming support for the death penalty and how it is likely even greater for murder victim survivors.

I have spoken and written extensively about the fact that anti death penalty activists, including legislators, have constantly put up roadblocks to death penalty reforms, reforms which, if allowed to be implemented, would lower costs and appellate time and also lower victim survivors suffering.

The blame for increased costs and suffering is solely due to anti death penalty efforts. Excessive resources and energy are only required due to anti death penalty efforts.

Get out of the way and stop complaining about all the problems that you and other antis are causing.

The need for lengthy (and expensive) appeals in death penalty cases is clearly deomonstrated by the discovery of many, many innocent people who have been sentenced to death. By blaming liberal elites, you are looking at this issue through a political lens, and I believe that’s a mistake. There are actually a number of prominent conservates who oppose the death penalty, including Richard Viguerie, Brent Bozell, David Keene of the American Conservative Union and former board chair of the NRA, and Pat Nolan of the Prison Fellowship Ministries. It certainly desn’t take a liberal to apprecite that the death penalty has serious drawbacks – the most compelling of which is the common-sense realization that human beiings, not to mention government programs, are fallible. Ron Paul opposes the death penalty bcause his is a consistent libertarian with serious and principled concerns about the abuse of government power. The death penalty is a serious issue of morality and jutice, a while I know that reasonable people of good will can disagree about the death penalty, the introduction of political ideology into this deabate can only cloud the issue. Best wishes,
David

Then, had appeals been speeded up, those actual innocents would have been released sooner.

Virginia executes in 5-7 years and has no case of an innocent executed.

I am not blaming some “liberal elites”, I am blaming anti death penalty folks, who want to make the system as lengthly and as expensive as they can and as harmful to murder victim survivors who approve of execution.

I didn’t say anything about liberals vs conservatives or politics. You did.